Canadian Election: lets talk politics

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:45 pm

Political debates are almost as hopeless as religious ones, so I've avoided them here in the past. But reading about the Conservatives' platform on copyright legislations, I'm compelled to speak up. To get my bias clear first: I'm Christian and I've been voting Conservatives for the last 2 elections. But unless they substantially change their platform, I will not vote for them this election and I urge Canadians reading this not to. Here's why.

From the Conservatives' platform:

Quote:

Dion (Liberals) wants to impose a massive carbon tax that will drive up the cost of everything and hurt families.

That is a lame and empty attack on a good idea. Living in BC, we've already implemented the carbon tax and our economy is doing just fine. Harper either doesn't understand what "revenue neutral" means or is just being conservative for the sake of being Conservative. I drive, and I'd gladly pay more on gas so we have greater incentives for the marketability of viable, mainstream electric cars sooner than later. Same goes for more non-carbon power plants. Strike 1 for the Conservatives.

And for the most important and relevant issue, copyright, the Conservatives show no intent to revise or drop bill C-61, and supports ACTA which is an even worse idea. They shown no support for Geist's copyright pledge, and have continued to show no interest in soliciting feedback from the Canadian public on C-61, a most important legislation since the internet regarding copyright and how we share and consume information. This is about the freedom of speech in the digital age. Strike 2 and out for the Conservatives.

Right now, it seems the Conservatives are leading the polls. But I know about 3.7 million Canadians visited isoHunt last month, which is more than 10% of Canada's population. So I ask all who read this to tell your Canadian friends to not be a slacker and vote on Oct. 14. I don't care which party you vote, just vote any party but the Conservatives.

Here are some more links to more information on election issues:
- Vote strategically and not just your favorite party. If there's a way to keep the Conservatives from having a majority govt, this is how. This site is an environmentalists' site but they have the exact same goal as we do with a fair copyright agenda. They have great polls data per riding, and recommendation so as to not have the oppositions split their votes. Must visit site.
- Latest election poll stats (updated Oct. 13)
- Election Notebook blog
- Liberals, Conservatives, NDP on twitter
- MPs growing support for Geist's copyright pledge (all non-Conservatives)
- Book author Atwood blasts Harper for his treatment of the arts

For the US election, discuss here instead, this thread is for Canadian election only. But then there isn't much to talk about is there, the debates are an one sided comedy. Laughing

UPDATE: Interesting video message from Jack Layton of the NDP to p2pnet. Quote: "Social networking sites, torrent sites, youtube... the truly interactive websites are... fundamental to making a democracy work." What a nice quote we can use to argue our case! He also touched on support for net neutrality. Torrentfreak has a write-up.

Also on issue of this site's neutrality and me "campaigning": raising awareness on copyright and cultural issues, which are facing more important changes than most other elections, that's what I'm really after. We are not endorsing any party. You don't have to agree with any of my politics and your freedom of speech is very much the issue I'm raising. This site, its treatment of links it indexes and comments posted on it has and will always remain neutral.

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:34 pm

funni64 wrote:

Go Obama!

you are ree todd ed, that has nothing to do with Canadian politics...

as for IH,
you seem to be in almost as big a pickle as we are down here.
Where one politician bashes another for a vote he made in the senate when the attacking politician in fact voted the same way.
it's ridiculous, I totally agree on the carbon taxing. It seems more to me like it's motivated by where his campaign money is coming from though, the same thing happens down here, they make really bad ideals like offshore drilling sound like the best thing we could possibly do because it supports the coffers their money comes from. I see the attack on the carbon tax being similarly motivated. As for the copyright law, seems a bit off that it would ever get passed as written.

Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:27 pm

Crooked_Ferret wrote:

As for the copyright law, seems a bit off that it would ever get passed as written.

If the Conservatives don't get ridiculed enough, it just might.

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:25 am

speak for yourself. all the power in nova scotia is generated by coal. every item in every store is transported by diesel power. people are going to be scammed for their home heating, their electricity, their food, their automobiles (no its not an option to drive its a necessity). i'm sorry, but you are being quite naive on this to suggest that the average taxpayer who pays out over $10,000 a year in income alone is gonna swallow more tax money for the sake of doing nothing. libs are liars. emissions rose by 28% under them. money scam to buy kyoto credits from china. i hope you are allowing dissenting opinions. politics aside... still love the site and content! keep up the good fight!!!

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:46 am

Guys, don't just vote for ANY party... You seem to be forgetting that Canada has a 'first past the post' voting system. VOTE STRATEGICALLY. I'm voting for Libs only to keep the Conservative candidate for my riding out of that seat. If I knew for certain that Liberals would win the seat, then I could go throw away my vote on another party (which i was originally planning to do.)

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:20 am

I cannot believe how the world has turned on its head where Conservative Americans are looking to holiday in Canada or Australia for the next four years.

This "first past the post" concept is intriguing and I am going to have to google that because I am not familiar with parliamentary governance.

All I can say is that the carbon tax, like all taxes, seem to do fine "at first." Just like "sub-prime lending" or as the leftwingers in America call it: "affordable housing." But its a cancer and it spreads, just like these well intentioned policies to get poor people into homes, its bringing down our economy fast (but we'll survive as we always do because of our common British legacies of freedom and self rule).

But back to the carbon tax - or any other cap and trade "scheme" has already been tried and failed. Sure, it may work in BC but not in Nova Scotia - so why would you want Harper to push it nationally? What benefits Canada in decreasing its carbon emissions when the only other major country that's actually lowered theirs in the last several years IS the United States.

Slap carbon tariffs on Chinese imports and Indian imports...but don't stifle your local economy over increasingly dubious evidence that the planet is warming.

From what I can read, Harper is suffering from the same bizarre phenom that happens to conservatives once they reach Washington - they forgot why they got there and begin to moderate so much that they change nothing.

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:52 pm

Echoes24 wrote:

Guys, don't just vote for ANY party... You seem to be forgetting that Canada has a 'first past the post' voting system. VOTE STRATEGICALLY. I'm voting for Libs only to keep the Conservative candidate for my riding out of that seat. If I knew for certain that Liberals would win the seat, then I could go throw away my vote on another party (which i was originally planning to do.)

Agreed.

On Carbon tax, 2 words: revenue neutral. That means you get a Net tax benefit if you burn less carbon than the average person, and taxed more if you burn more. No one said we can stop burning coal or stop driving diesel/gas right away. But when we renovate our home and decide on electric stove or gas, that's when the incentive kicks in in our decision making. For the long term, incentives is what matters in slowly moving away from burning carbon. Doesn't matter what you think about global warming, I don't quite buy it either. But putting out too much carbon in the air is just bad.

And the carbon tax is a Liberal policy (not sure if NDP pushes it) so vote as you will, but as above said, vote strategically. My whole point is to note vote Conservatives or at least don't let them have a majority govt this term.

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:15 pm

Usually i am just disgusted by the options that we have in canada (i guess it's like in south park, the choice between a Giant Dutch and a Turd Sandwich). But this year I feel that I will have to vote for the BQ, even if I think that this party shouldn't exist, but it's the only one who have a chance against the CPC where I live. What I couldn't understand is how someone who is, I guess, progressive for the Internet, can be for the ban on abortions. As to download and upload files is a choice that you make, and no one should be able to impede you to do what you want on the internet, abortion is a choice that only those who are directly concerned, the fathers, should decide what to do... Anyway, to do the best strategic choice, go over there : voteforenvironment.ca This site, with your ZIP code, show you who you should vote for so the CPC don't win.

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:45 pm

Why does no one consider Libertarians? Have you looked into the LP? As a Christian you should be happy with them. Of course, it won't matter much since you're Canadian, but it's still disgusting how no one thinks about the other choices out there. Ron Paul would have been the best president possible I think but dropped out. Now the only hope left is Bob Barr, and no one know about him, which means he'll never win. Media doesn't help. It's McCain versus Obama as far as they're concerned, which leaves the uninformed human thinking what Faux News says about these people is the ultimate truth. I think I'm ranting now so I'll stop, but before I do:

Choose liberty, vote Libertarian... Smile

Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:16 pm

Normally I'd agree with you on all counts, except that the other parties are much worse. The NDP want to turn Canada into the Soviet Union, and the Liberals are more arrogant and out of touch with everyday working Canadians than a pampered millionaire hotel heiress. The conservatives have some boneheaded policies, but as far as I can see it, they're the best of a really bad lot.

In the end it all comes down to each individual's pet causes. Canadians will vote for the party that most strongly (seems to) represent their favoured issues. My only issue is fair taxation, so I usually vote along the same lines as the Canadian Taxpayer's Federation. So far the Conservatives are winning that fight by a long shot.

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:22 am

aaronarnwine wrote:

All I can say is that the carbon tax, like all taxes, seem to do fine "at first." Just like "sub-prime lending" or as the leftwingers in America call it: "affordable housing."

Affordable housing and sub-prime lending are two totally different things. Affordable housing is an initiative to get families who could never afford a down payment, but who otherwise COULD afford the monthly payments, into a home. This is typically accomplished by adding a portion of the down payment into the actual loan(200k home +40K down payment usually means 160k left to pay. With affordable housing it becomes 200k +(40k- what ever down payment the family can afford.)

With sub prime lending, banks and other lending institutions intentionally advertise and lend to people who could NEVER afford to pay back the loan. It typically involves an initial structure like the one above(take whatever money they can afford to pay) and then trick them into thinking they can actually afford the payments by slipping in a 5-10 year ARM( adjustable rate mortgage) Once the five to ten year period is up they default. Bank keeps the money and the house....

Unfortunately none of the R-tards thought this brilliant scheme all the way through.

And yes, virtually all of the bullshit going on with the world economy can be blamed entirely on Bush's failed policies of deregulation and no government oversight.

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:42 am

It seems everyone here is strategically avoiding talking about the issue of same sex marriage - i can honestly say i was shocked to read your views as i have yet to understand any argument against it. If you are worried about corrupting the tradition of marriage then do like we did in the UK and give it a different name "civil partnerships" have been hugely successful. All people are asking for are the same legal rights.
I can only assume that it comes from your disgust of homosexuals - all too often people focus on one small footnote in the bible and in doing so miss the entire pervading message of love and tolerance (the fact that we still have hate in the name of Jesus is an irony i will never understand)

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:54 am

tomkatsumi wrote:

It seems everyone here is strategically avoiding talking about the issue of same sex marriage - i can honestly say i was shocked to read your views as i have yet to understand any argument against it. If you are worried about corrupting the tradition of marriage then do like we did in the UK and give it a different name "civil partnerships" have been hugely successful. All people are asking for are the same legal rights.
I can only assume that it comes from your disgust of homosexuals - all too often people focus on one small footnote in the bible and in doing so miss the entire pervading message of love and tolerance (the fact that we still have hate in the name of Jesus is an irony i will never understand)

I said religious debates are hopeless, so I'll just explain where I came from in 1 sentence and no more. I have no problem with people who are homosexual, but the act is not the natural order of things, is bad for society and laws shouldn't endorse it.

Main issue of this thread is about the copyright issue and whichever side you are on on other issues, I see little reason to vote Conservatives even if you are against legalizing homosexuality like I am. So lets see reasons to why you'd vote Conservatives and we can try to shoot those down Laughing

I'll start: Conservatives been doing a pretty good job managing govt finances and our economy, despite the craphole the US dugg itself. Which parties may do as good as Conservatives on that regard?

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:35 am

I hate the carbon tax because there is no real proof that carbon drives climate change. But Im still voting Leberal. I dont mind what gays do and I think straight people have already destroyed any sanctity in marriage.
The conservatives spent the 54 billion saved in the EI fund and left us only 2 billion, not a good idea for the future if people start losing jobs.

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:30 am

I am a little unsure how this carbon taxing can work effectivley and furthermore how the money is to counteract climate change. Will said goverments be buying land to grow more trees to mop up excess carbon. Whilst climate change is happening Carbon dioxide in studies seems to have the least effect compared to water vapour etc. etc.

If carbon dioxide is such a huge problem then surley if your power supplier use alternative means; nuclear, winds, wave, tidal, HEP etc then surley you schould be excempt from the above tax. On top of this the tax should be used as previously mentioned to counter strike the climate change and also develop alternative fuels and should not be for anything else.

Surely this is the way to go?

In response to tomkatsumi I have to agree with him. In the UK our probably single greatest unsung war hero was arrested for the grounds of being homosexual and was "treated" for it. This sounds very Nazi to me like how hitler "treated" the disabled, elderly etc.etc.
I used to be a very strong christian but while I still believe in god I can not go to church where there is a constant reminder of the sufefring and persecution all religion bring.

We celebrate the crusaders who went to show fight the uncivilised muslims, the bible tells us of the good samaritan but also of how god kill thousands for "his people" indiscrimatley. It would be very easy to make a comparison to hitler and god in this case where tyhey both killed to "look after there people". The song "I Ain't Afraid" by Holly Near springs to mind. The good samaritan helped people and although wasn't jewish or nowaday we would say christain he still was guarantueed his place in heaven (or equivalent) because he selflessly helped people regardless to their own safety.

whilst not natural (this we can't deny) does not mean it is wrong. You all have computers which are not natural, would we call this wrong. With high number of population any decent statiscian will tell we need people to die at a faster rate then they are breeding. Maybe this is gos way of remedying a problem. Love, caring compassion etc without the need for children. Homeless children would be more likely adopted in to a craing and understanding enviroment.

At the end of the day all of use want freedom. We should not effect other peoples,

Just my 2 cents